Q&A with author John A. Jenkins

Q: What most intrigues you about Chief Justice Rehnquist,
and why did you decide to write a biography of him?

A: I’ll answer the last part first:The short answer is that the job of Chief
Justice is one of enormous importance in our tripartite form of government, and
that makes him a worthy subject of great historical significance.It’s a biography that really matters.In terms of what intrigued me and drew me to
him as a subject:he put up something of
a “Do Not Enter” sign around his life.No memoir, very few interviews, papers not easily accessible.A journalist’s job is to find out things that
people don’t necessarily want us to know.And I had the only substantive interviews with him – for The New York
Times Magazine – that delved into his own views about the Court.So it was a logical project.

Q: You write, "Rehnquist's judicial philosophy was
nihilistic at its core, disrespectful of precedent and dismissive of social,
economic, and political institutions that did not comport with his
black-and-white view of the world." What caused you to come to that conclusion,
and what are some examples of that philosophy and worldview?

A: That one sentence has received a lot of attention, as I
expected it would.But it’s an
inescapable conclusion for anyone who objectively examines the full record of
Rehnquist’s life.Or for anyone who
reads The Partisan.Rehnquist had a view
of the world that was flash frozen at childhood.His world had good guys and bad guys.He voted against every affirmative-action
program the Court ever considered.He
called stare decisis, honoring legal precedent, a “sham.”Rehnquist came to the Court with a personal
agenda to steer it to the right, and he was very direct about that in our
interviews.He was also pretty
successful – although, as I write, not as successful as he could have
been.

Q: Both your new biography and a 1985 New York Times piece
you wrote about Rehnquist are titled "The Partisan." What do you see as the significance of that
title as it relates to Rehnquist and his role on the court, and can you tell us
about Rehnquist's reaction to your 1985 article?

A: When the editors at The Times Magazine gave my article
that title, they were actually quoting Rehnquist.He openly acknowledged his partisanship
during our interviews.He was very
comfortable with the description.I
thought “Partisan” it was the best possible title for his biography, because
that one word really captures him.When
the magazine article first came out, I think he probably thought he’d been
accurately portrayed.But I know he didn’t
like the cover photograph, because he told his sister so in a letter the next
day.He did sort of look like an
avenging angel in that photo, but I had nothing to do with it!Later on, particularly during his 1986
confirmation hearings, his comments to me about Plessy and Brown caused him
trouble.By 1996, he was vowing never to
give another such interview and citing my article as the reason why.

Q: Which of the
current justices would you describe as partisans, and do you see partisanship continuing
on the court in the future?

A: I think the Court is comprised now of partisans on both
sides, probably to a greater extent than at any time in its history and
certainly since academic experts got serious about analyzing the philosophical
drift of the Court starting with the administration of FDR.That is actually Rehnquist’s most potent,
enduring legacy.Yes, it will
continue.

Q: What are you working on now?

A: Among other things, another book project about the
Court.Stay tuned.

Q: Anything else we should know?

A: One of the fascinating things I uncovered during my
research was the great regard that Rehnquist had for a justice who in many ways
was his polar opposite:Bill Douglas. Rehnquist had made no secret of his disdain for
Douglas, going all the way back to Rehnquist’s clerkship at the Court in the
early 1950s.And yet Douglas reached out
to young Justice Rehnquist from the day Rehnquist arrived there in 1972.Both men were rugged individualists, fiercely
independent. Politically, they agreed on
almost nothing.Yet there grew to be
genuine affection and mutual regard.That is my favorite part of the biography.

About Me

Author, THE PRESIDENT AND ME: GEORGE WASHINGTON AND THE MAGIC HAT, new children's book (Schiffer, 2016). Co-author, with Marvin Kalb, of HAUNTING LEGACY: VIETNAM AND THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY FROM FORD TO OBAMA (Brookings Institution Press, 2011).